To set the stage for our earthly mythical history, or a “Myth-history” as John Major Jenkins coined in his elaborate works on Pacal Votan. Herein the Anunnaki are presumed to be known as an alternative species emerged as an advanced humanoid species on Earth, distinguished by their unique psychic powers (see appendix). This, though distinctly presumed, is to account for a natural history, and not pertaining to otherworldly sources of life on Earth. Herein the Annunaki, are described as closer to the Homo Sapien Paracas, and this account relies on this presumption, which is not a standard or commonly accepted history of Earth and its people. Thus this article cannot be interpreted as historical fact, as it is, though invoking historical fact and abridging the alternative history with commonly accepted history.
On the assumption that an advanced cognitive cranial architecture granted the Anunnaki extraordinary abilities over the more primitive sapiens, such as:
Enhanced focus and deep processing, allowing for remarkable technological innovations
Profound understanding of frequency manipulation and resonance
Ability to harness acute energies for construction and engineering
The Anunnaki's superior mental faculties are irreducibly what enabled their progenitor status regarding the earthly megalithic structures, built in the deep past. Presumably these structures required the using of advanced techniques, and collaboratively were applied for breeding and cross-breeding other species of humans, animals, and plants.
Considering any coexistence between the Anunnaki and early humans, it was evidently fraught with tension. The Anunnaki initially presumably used humans for indentured service, as workers and or breeding purposes, rewarding the lesser sapiens with carnal pleasures and culinary delights for example. It would have been a favored vocation to hunter-gatherer lifestyles, though however popularized in modern indigenous accounting.
Inevitable resentments and rebellion must have ensued among the human populations not under the yoke of the Annunaki.
Driven by primal instincts and a desire for freedom, humans began to reject the Anunnaki's authority. Despite their inferior cognitive abilities, humans were willing to commit atrocities to escape any aroused perceptions of enslavement, and probably countering direct psycho-social repression among the lesser tribes outside the Annunaki sphere of influence (groups were coerced into rebellion to obtain benefits). The blame essentially was squared on the ruling elite a trend continuing in common politics of states, but predominating the discourse as family feuds, royal assassinations and things notably, or attributively ‘anarchy’. The conflagration of ‘’annunaki’ with ‘anarchy’ concerns this now political schism of the dual-hemispheric limitations of human beings in society, where those humans acting to restore unjust persecutions by removing royals from power, in overseeing, said (even though indirect) persecutions outside their sphere of influence.
Eventually total de-establishment through rebellion by the Sapien Sapiens may have affected total destruction of advanced technological society in favor for an 8,000 year long de-evolution into a primitive stone age society where without the Annunaki overseeing certain followers, ALL Homo Sapien Sapiens had equal footing and so the survival of the strongest was mandated, instead of prosperity of the servitors to the Annunaki.
As the Anunnaki's influence forceably waned, an allegorical flood of destruction emerged as the prevailing narrative (probably accompanied by an actual great tidal flood), such that eventually the biblical society took hold over Greek, and Sumerian history as a ‘reemergence’. Since humanity descended into a period of technological regression and social upheaval, the loss of the Anunnaki's guidance and technology was the cause and emerging from this with the goal of reclamation, only fragments of their advanced knowledge survive in myths and legends, and particularly as Ma’at, the order to recover the lost cosmic order.
The remnants of the Anunnaki who survived the waves of persecution by raging ‘anarchists’ retreated to isolated regions, from Mesopotamia, and particularly the Black Sea, into areas known as Cusco, Peru, and forming the Inca later, or the cradle of Lower Egypt. From these strongholds, they continued the attempts to reintroduce elements of their advanced knowledge to primitive human societies, leading to the gradual re-establishment of civilization, but once again the progenitors society were afflicted by Sapien Sapiens jealously, as mass slaughter evidently ensued for those followers of the Peruvian colony who deliberately emulated their progenitors shape of cranium by binding children heads to elongate the skulls.
The evidence remains at the last known conflict between the long-headed rulers and other human groups in ancient Peru occurred around 1400-1500 CE, based on archaeological evidence from the Colca Valley region. Excavations have revealed mass graves containing skeletal remains of individuals with artificially elongated skulls, suggesting a targeted attack against this group.
The practice of cranial deformation was likely a marker of elite status and lineage for maintaining ‘royal’ customs and authority pertaining to initiations beyond the reckoning of the sapien sapiens due to their combined education, and importantly their dual hemispheric brains. This practice extends right across the world indicating that the emulation was standardized somewhat. Integrated into the story of Moses where the Jewish child (mesu) was hidden from the Royals, and becoming one of them through adoption (this presumes the uptake of all longheaded babies as actual Annunaki).
However, the proven genocide of the artificially elongated skull population, and servitors of the colonial rulers marked a significant shift in power dynamics. It may have represented a rebellion against the established order or a conflict between rival factions vying for control of the region, but it’s evident that reprisal was sought from these followers for any reason be it exclusion or other vice attributable to non-servitors of the progenitors.
The loss of these enlightened rulers and their direct descendants potentially led to a decline in some of the most advanced knowledge and technologies in the region, where flight technology is evident at the Nasca and other petroglyphs. Nevertheless, echoes of their influence persisted in Inca culture, architecture, and religious practices, and significant megalithic monuments remain despite the Spanish deliberate deconstruction of the edifices.
This
article thus has all concerned Progenitor-ship so far. The
implications of a Sapien sapiens race who have dual hemispheres
(split-brains) in contextual ramification requires a deeper
undertaking. In looking back at the Summerian and Biblical stories
which account for de-munition against ‘God(s)’, and the motive
and reason for rebellion in this primitive context, is the prime
point of digression. As its a likely scenario that the Annunaki
directly avoided any reactionary responses from non-servile Homo
Sapien Sapiens. The concept of unjust suffering thus marks this
inquiry where the manufacture of non-servile disrepute marks the
decline of sophisticated authority. That is it's the limitations of
the cranial capacities of Homo Sapiens which the Annunaki couldn't
manage.
To address this topical narrative, the theme of unjust suffering is central to Ludlul-Bel-Nemeqi and likewise to the biblical Book of Job. These share significant similarities, reflecting a shared cultural concern in the ancient Near East about the nature of divine justice and human suffering. However, they differ in their theological frameworks and resolutions.
Firstly, the Ludlul-Bel-Nemeqi, also known as "The Poem of the Righteous Sufferer" or "I Will Praise the Lord of Wisdom," is a significant Babylonian literary work dating to around 1700 BCE. This poetic narrative, composed in Akkadian, explores themes of unjust suffering, divine justice, and ultimate restoration. The poem consists of approximately 500 lines divided into four or five tablets. It tells the story of Shubshi-meshre-Shakkan, a wealthy and pious Babylonian nobleman who falls from grace and endures great suffering before being restored.
Narrative elements:
Initial Prosperity: The protagonist is described as a devout man who honors the gods and fulfills his social duties.
Sudden Misfortune: Without apparent reason, he is struck by various calamities, including illness, social ostracism, and loss of status.
Lamentations: The sufferer expresses his anguish and confusion, questioning the justice of the gods.
Divine Intervention: Eventually, the god Marduk intervenes to restore the sufferer's health and social standing.
Restoration and Praise: The poem concludes with the protagonist praising Marduk for his mercy and wisdom.
Wider Thematic (meta-narrative):
Theodicy: The work grapples with the problem of why the righteous suffer, a theme also found in the biblical Book of Job.
Divine Inscrutability: It emphasizes that the ways of the gods are beyond human understanding.
Faith and Perseverance: Despite his trials, the sufferer maintains his faith, ultimately leading to his restoration.
Medical Knowledge: The poem demonstrates awareness of contemporary medical vocabulary and practices.
In Ludlul-Bel-Nemeqi, the protagonist, Shubshi-meshre-Shakkan, is a pious man afflicted with severe suffering without apparent cause. He loses his health, social standing, and peace of mind, yet continues to seek understanding and redemption through his god, Marduk. Similarly, Job is described as "blameless and upright," yet he endures immense suffering, losing his wealth, family, and health. Job also struggles to comprehend why he, an innocent man, has been subjected to such trials. Both texts emphasize the silence or perceived absence of the divine during the protagonist's suffering. In Ludlul-Bel-Nemeqi, Shubshi-meshre-Shakkan laments that neither diviners nor priests can explain his plight, yet he continues to praise Marduk. In Jobs tale, God remains silent for much of the narrative as Job wrestles with his affliction and defends his innocence against accusations from his friends.
Both works highlight the inscrutability of divine will. In Ludlul-Bel-Nemeqi, Shubshi meshre-Shakkan ultimately acknowledges Marduk's wisdom and mercy despite his suffering. In Job, God's response underscores His omnipotence and the limitations of human understanding, emphasizing that divine justice operates on a scale beyond human comprehension. Ludlul-Bel-Nemeqi alternatively reflects Mesopotamian polytheism. The protagonist's suffering is attributed to divine wrath or neglect, but he maintains faith that Marduk will eventually restore him because of the god's inherent mercy. Job operates within a monotheistic framework. His suffering is part of a cosmic test permitted by God to demonstrate Job's faithfulness. The narrative explores deeper questions about divine justice and human morality.
In Ludlul-Bel-Nemeqi, Shubshi-meshre-Shakkan is eventually restored to health and prosperity by Marduk, affirming the god's benevolence. Whilst in Job, God also restores Job's fortunes but blesses him with greater prosperity than before. The resolution also includes a profound theological lesson: humans cannot fully grasp God's purposes but must trust in His wisdom and justice. Scholars often note that Ludlul-Bel-Nemeqi focuses more on reaffirming faith in divine mercy through ritual praise rather than deeply questioning the nature of suffering or justice. Both texts grapple with the problem of unjust suffering but reflect their respective cultural and theological contexts. While Ludlul-Bel-Nemeqi emphasizes faith in divine mercy within a polytheistic worldview, Job presents a more profound exploration of divine justice in a monotheistic framework. Together, they illustrate humanity's enduring struggle to reconcile faith with the reality of suffering.
In Ludlul-Bel-Nemeqi, Shubshi-meshre-Shakkan receives no consolation or support from friends or family during his suffering. The text explicitly emphasizes his isolation. Shubshi-meshre-Shakkan laments that his city and land have turned against him, treating him as an enemy. His colleagues and community, rather than offering support, conspire against him out of jealousy and malice. Even his family does not console him. At one point, they are described as preparing for his funeral while he is still alive, underscoring the complete lack of emotional or practical support during his trials. Instead of turning to human relationships for solace, the protagonist places his hope entirely in Marduk. His eventual restoration comes not through human compassion but through divine mercy, as Marduk sends a priest to signal his salvation.
This stark absence of human consolation contrasts with the Book of Job, where Job's friends—though flawed in their counsel—at least attempt to engage with him during his suffering. In Ludlul-Bel-Nemeqi, the protagonist's loneliness intensifies the theme of unjust suffering and highlights the ultimate reliance on divine justice for resolution.
The differing responses that Ludlul-Bel-Nemeqi and the Book of Job engender in their audiences stem from their distinct theological frameworks, narrative structures, and emotional tones. Both texts address the problem of unjust suffering, but they evoke different reflections and emotional reactions due to their unique approaches. Ludlul-Bel-Nemeqi reassures its audience with a resolution rooted in divine mercy and restoration through ritual devotion. It fosters faith in cosmic order without delving into existential doubts. The Book of Job evokes a more complex emotional response by confronting readers with the limits of human understanding and offering a nuanced portrayal of suffering that includes anger, questioning, and eventual reconciliation.
In essence, Ludlul-Bel-Nemeqi seeks to comfort its audience with assurances of divine benevolence, while Job challenges its readers to grapple with profound theological questions about suffering, justice, and belonging. This matter of differentiation speaks yards about the scholarly uptake of the moral imperatives in the eras between the two books recording as common texts. The dynamical interplay with Eliphaz, Bildad, Zophar, and later Elihu also resonates with broader theological themes, and into military traditions where distancing oneself from suffering ensures fiscal integrity.
As Job’s friends failed to console him and instead accused him of wrongdoing, assuming that his suffering must be a punishment for sin (Job 4:7-9; 8:3-6). This reflects a retributive view of justice—good people are rewarded, and evil people are punished. By condemning Job, they distance themselves from his suffering. This act of judgement allows them to maintain their belief in a predictable moral universe where they are safe from similar affliction as long as they remain "righteous." Their inability to empathise with Job highlights their moral failing. Rather than offering compassion, they exacerbate his suffering with accusations and long-winded arguments (Job 16:2-3). This lack of compassion is implicitly condemned by God, who rebukes the friends at the end of the narrative for misrepresenting Him and failing to speak truthfully about divine justice (Job 42:7-8). While the text does not explicitly depict the friends as enjoying Job’s suffering, their insistence on blaming him could be seen as a way to emotionally distance themselves from his pain. This detachment mirrors a broader human tendency to rationalize or minimize others' suffering to avoid confronting its unsettling implications.
The tendency to condemn Job reflects a universal human impulse to avoid identifying with suffering. By attributing Job’s suffering to sin or personal failure, his friends create a psychological barrier between themselves and his plight. This allows them to maintain a sense of control over their own lives, believing that such suffering could not happen to them if they remain "good". Condemning Job may also stem from fear. His inexplicable suffering challenges their worldview, forcing them to confront the possibility that suffering can be random or undeserved—a deeply unsettling realization. This pattern resonates with later theological narratives, such as the treatment of Jesus in Christian tradition. Like Job, Jesus is unjustly condemned and suffers despite his innocence.
The friends’ failure has significant epistemological consequences for how audiences understand suffering, good, and evil, and marks the response to Jewish biblical narratives from the regional continuity of ethical society. In Jewish tradition, Job’s story serves as a reminder that humans must approach suffering with humility and avoid presuming knowledge of God’s purposes. The friends’ failure becomes a cautionary tale against arrogance and misjudgement. Christian interpretations often draw parallels between Job and Jesus, particularly in how both figures endure unjust suffering while being condemned by others. The emphasis shifts toward recognizing innocence in suffering and responding with compassion rather than judgement.
The universal human tendency to avoid confronting vulnerability by blaming others is deeply tied to societal behaviors, particularly in contexts like a gambler’s society, where perceptions of luck and misfortune shape social dynamics. In such societies, the suffering of others—especially the poor or those perceived as "unlucky"—is often rationalized or ignored as a means of maintaining psychological and social distance. This dynamic resonates with Job’s story, where his friends condemn him to protect their own sense of security, and it should be contrasted with the Marduk narrative and Christian reinterpretations of suffering through Jesus. This inquiry extends to capitalism in general where one’s suffering is directly levied in the supplications of bounties, and returns us to the reason for Jesus’ persecution, having raged in the marketplace.
Generally acts of charity in such societies often serve more to reinforce distance with the ‘unlucky’ or ‘cursed’, rather than bridge it. For example, donating to anonymous online charities or distant causes allows individuals to feel virtuous without engaging directly with the poor or confronting systemic inequalities. This behavior mirrors Job’s friends’ approach: rather than offering true comfort or solidarity, they focus on preserving their own sense of moral and social order. Just as Job’s friends blame him for his suffering, members of a gambler’s society may rationalize poverty by attributing it to laziness, poor decisions, or inherent unluckiness. This absolves them of any responsibility to address the root causes of inequality or engage meaningfully with those who suffer. Likewise it sets the stage for commercial exploitation which is evidently a runaway train of moral bankruptcy.
In Christian theology, Jesus embodies the ultimate case of unjust suffering though responding himself by drawing near to those who suffer rather than distancing himself from them (e.g., ministering to the poor, healing the sick). His life and teachings challenge societal norms that isolate the vulnerable. In turn his death is regarded as the most unjust suffering, an iconic status of unjust suffering in fact. Jesus directly critiques wealth as a means of distancing oneself from others (e.g., the parable of Lazarus and the rich man in Luke 16:19-31). He emphasizes that true righteousness involves active engagement with those who suffer rather than passive acts of charity designed to maintain distance.
This teaching stands in stark contrast to capitalist tendency to use wealth as a barrier against vulnerability, for impunity. Christianity and Judaism have re-framed suffering not only as punishment or bad luck but as an opportunity for redemption and transformation. By blessing those who suffer (e.g., the Beatitudes), Jesus challenges societal assumptions about luck and worthiness, whilst his followers to this day attribute his death and compensation for their own sufferings, in a ultimate levy.
Its a fundamental flaw in society regarding a substantial ‘benchmark of suffering’, or suffrage. It lies in how suffering is commodified, justified, or ignored, rather than meaningfully balanced with its outcomes or purpose and overruled. This concerns weighing up more with less suffering as ideals emphasized in political rule. Suffering, in its essence, is thus treated as a political transactional measure—whether in economic systems, social hierarchies, or moral frameworks—without recognizing its deeper relational or existential dimensions, citizens are bound to comply, they are bound to suffer more or less. Welfare systems so require proof of toil or compliance (e.g., job-seeking) to justify aid. Built on Economic systems that commodify suffering through pricing mechanisms that exclude the poor from basic needs or wants determined as unworthiness. The prevailing issues are built on the natural world which requires that suffering be balanced in creation or renewal as a woman suffers in childbirth but finds meaning in the life created—a coupling of pain and joy on a spread of nine months.
As with common psychological and sociological theories; here children’s exposure to authority figures (such as parents) and their experiences within the family structure significantly shape emotional responses (to suffering), including one will process suffering and pleasure of themselves or others. The core family model—its stability or deviations—can create ‘mini-sufferings’ for children, such as feelings of insecurity, confusion, or emotional neglect. When children witness great suffering outside of themselves, it can indeed invoke a kind of catharsis, potentially triggering pleasure responses as a coping or release mechanism. Its the vain of modern institution to label those suffering compounded micro-transactional disputes (sufferings) as having a certain condition, in an attempt to forge a remedial approach that is full-proof, and able to rectify the lesser sufferings, and avoiding greater suffering. This is presumed to be the boon of our modern society, by the medical institution under governmental jurisprudence.
Let’s explore the base dynamics more deeply;
The traditional male-female parental model often provides children with a sense of security and stability. This stability allows them to process their emotions in a safe environment.
Witnessing parental pleasure (e.g., affection, laughter, or even love-making, whether directly or indirectly) enforces emotional connectivity with the world and intimacy for others.
When the core family model is disrupted (e.g., through divorce, absence of one parent, or conflict), children may experience the lesser sufferings such as insecurity, confusion about relationships, or feelings of abandonment.
These small emotional wounds can ensure a course for great suffering if fulled. Without the emotional tools to process these experiences fully, children may develop complex responses triggered by witnessing suffering in others.
When children witness significant suffering (e.g., another child being hurt or humiliated), it can provoke a cathartic response. This is because the suffering resonates with their own unresolved sufferings, creating an emotional bubble, isolating the individual from others and the world. Laughter or amusement at others’ suffering can be a way for children to process discomfort or fear without fully confronting it. Conversely, if parents dismiss or mock suffering—or if they fail to address their child’s lesser suffering—children may internalize these behaviors and replicate them creating greater suffering in themselves and others.
Catharsis often involves mixed emotions: relief that they are not the ones suffering, or that others suffer the same as they do. So it’s a matter of recognition of their own vulnerability, and sometimes even pleasure at the contrast between their relative security and the other’s pain.
Pleasure responses to witnessing suffering was also classically commodified by gladiatorial sports, though this is largely reduced in the modern era, and approving of others’ suffering is generally limited to those committing heinous crimes and so proven guilty, such as a public execution.
Produced by J S Jowett (with AI assistance. This is an independent article published by J S Jowett. Mar. 2025.
Appendix #1
The concept of monotropism provides an interesting lens through which to view the hypothetical Anunnaki brain structure. Monotropism, typically associated with autism spectrum disorders, refers to a cognitive style characterized by intense focus on a single interest or task.
In the context of the hypothesis about the Anunnaki, a monotropic brain structure without hemispheric division could potentially offer several cognitive advantages:
Enhanced focus: A monotropic brain might allow for extraordinary concentration on specific tasks or areas of interest
Deep processing: The ability to delve deeply into subjects, potentially leading to advanced problem-solving and innovation
Flow states: Monotropic individuals often experience intense "flow states" of contentment and fulfillment when engaged in their interests
However, such a brain structure could also present challenges:
Difficulty with multitasking: A monotropic brain might struggle to process multiple streams of information simultaneously
Sensory sensitivity: Hypersensitivity to complex sensory environments is common in monotropic individuals
Potential for burnout: Continuous splitting of attention, as often required in daily life, could be exhausting for a monotropic brain
This hypothetical brain structure could explain some of the advanced capabilities attributed to the Anunnaki in various speculative narratives, such as their alleged technological and cognitive superiority. However, it's crucial to note that this remains a speculative concept not supported by current scientific evidence.
Appendix #2 The Poem of the Righteous Sufferer - Tablet 2
I survived to the next year, the appointed time passed. As I turned around, it was more and more terrible; My ill luck was on the increase, I could find no good fortune. I called to my god, but he did not show me his face. I prayed to my goddess, but she did not raise her head. The diviner with his inspection did not get to the bottom of it, Nor did the dream priest with his incense clear up my case. I beseeched a dream spirit, but it did not enlighten me. The incantation priest with his ritual did not appease the divine wrath against me. What bizarre actions there were everywhere!
I looked behind, there was persecution, trouble. Like one who has not made libations to his god, nor with a food offering invoked his goddess, who is not wont to prostrate himself, nor has been seen to bow down, from whose mouth there has been no issue of prayer or supplication who has skipped holy days and despised festivals, who has been neglectful and scorned the god's rites, who has not taught his people reverence and worship, who has not invoked his god but eaten his food offering, who has snubbed his goddess by not bringing a flour offering, like one possessed who has forgotten his Lord, who has casually sworn a solemn oath by his god, a (like such a one) did I seem! I, for my part, was mindful of supplication and prayer: to me prayer was the natural recourse, sacrifice my rule. The day for reverencing the gods was a joy to my heart; The day of the goddess's procession was my profit and return. Praying for the king, that was my joy, His fanfare was as if for (my own) good omen. I instructed my land to observe the god's rites, the goddess's precious name did I teach my people to value. Praise for the king I made like a god's and reverence for the palace I taught the populace. I wish I knew that these things were pleasing to a god!
What seems good to oneself could be an offence to a god, What in one's own heart seems abominable could be good to a god! Who can learn the reasoning of the gods in heaven? Who understands the plans of the underworld gods? Where might humans have learned the way of a god? He who was alive yesterday is dead today. For a minute someone is downcast, then suddenly full of cheer. One moment he sings in exaltation, another he groans like a professional mourner. The people's condition changes like opening and shutting (the legs) (i.e. in a twinkling). When starving they become like corpses, and when sated they rival their gods. In good times they speak of scaling heaven, but when it goes badly, they complain of going down to hell. [missing line]
As for me, the exhausted one, a whirlwind is driving me! Debilitating disease is let loose upon me; An evil wind has blown [from the ends] of the sky. Headache has surged upon me from the breast of the underworld. A malignant spectre has come forth from its hidden depth. [missing lines].
[My face] was gloomy, my eyes were in flood. They wrenched my neck muscles made my neck limp. They whacked my chest, pounded my breast. They affected my flesh and caused convulsions, [In] my epigastrium they kindled a fire. They churned up my bowels, they twisted my fingers. With coughing and hacking they infected [my lungs]. They wasted my limbs and made my fat quake. My lofty stature they toppled like a wall, My robust figure they laid down like a bulrush. I was thrown down like a dried fig, I was tossed onto my face. The alû-demon had clothed himself in my body for a garment. Drowsiness covered me like a net. My eyes stared, but did not see. My ears were open, but did not hear. Numbness had grasped my whole body, Paralysis had fallen upon my flesh. Stiffness had seized my arms, Impotence had beset my loins, My feelings had forgotten their motion. [missing lines].
A snare was laid on my mouth, and a bolt barred my lips. My way in was barred, and my 'drinking place' blocked. My hunger was chronic, and my gullet constricted. When grain is served, I choke it down like stinkweed. Beer, the sustenance of mankind, is sickening to me. Truly, the malady drags on. Through lack of food my features changed. My flesh was wasted, my blood had run dry. My bones were loose, they were covered (only) with my skin. My tissues were inflamed, they had caught the uriqtum-disease. I took to a bed of bondage; going out was exhausting. My house turned into a prison. My flesh was a shackle, and my arms became useless. My self was a fetter, as my feet became limp. My afflictions were grievous, and all the blows severe. A scourge has whipped me, one full of barbs. A crop pierced me, one covered in stings. All day long the tormentor tormented [me], (even) in the middle of the night he would not let me breathe freely for an instant. From writhing, my joints were separated. My limbs were splayed and knocked about. I spent the night in the dung like an ox, Like a sheep I wallowed in excrement. The exorcist recoiled from my symptoms, and the diviner perplexed by my omens. The exorcist could not diagnose the nature of my illness, nor could the diviner put a time limit on my illness. My god has not come to the rescue nor taken me by the hand. My goddess has not shown me pity nor come at my side. My grave was open, my funerary goods were ready, (Even) before I was dead, laments for me were over. All of my country said "How he was crushed!". When anyone who gloated at me heard, his features lit up. The tidings reached her who gloated at me, and her heart rejoiced. But I know the day for my whole family, When, among my friends, their Sun-god will have mercy.
Tablet 2 - Based on the translation by W. G. Lambert
No comments:
Post a Comment